Live data from Hacker News

Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

azure.microsoft.com

81–90 of 119 posts

Re: Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

#81
post #57

Yes, except you can't do the most basic things with DocumentDB and it becomes very expensive very fast. Especially if you want multiple collections. There's a lot lacking with DocumentDB, as evident from the feedback forum, that comparing it to Mongo is like comparing an infant to an adult. The infant might be cute, but it can't do a whole lot. https://feedback.azure.com/forums/263030-documentdb/filters/...

To build something similarly sized with the free version of Mongo would also be expensive. It's a trade off.

Re: Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

#82
post #74
post #39

Never looked at DocumentDB before. So if I get this straight, I can get a fully managed DB that can scale easily, but still have all the advantages and compatibility of a regular NoSQL like Mongo? I think that's a first, right?

Except that the advantages and compatibility are not all there. Plus there are now fully managed options for the real thing.

The advantages are real. Compatibility might not be 100%, but honestly Mongo isn't magic. DocumentDB has strengths of it's own.

Re: Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

#83
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that the advantages and compatibility are not all there. Plus there are now fully managed options for the real thing.

The advantages are real. Compatibility might not be 100%, but honestly Mongo isn't magic. DocumentDB has strengths of it's own.

I'd be happy to learn about your experience developing an application against DocumentDB and its strengths. Care to share?

Re: Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

#84
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What sort of database is effectively useless for querying? Cassandra, Riak, Voldemort, HBase, Bigtable, Azure Table Storage, and many other implementations of wide column stores have similarly limited querying. I'm also not sure what you mean by the limiting scaling model. I can go from 0 to 160k reads/second by turning a knob, and 160k is only the default limit (you can request higher limits). It is not a document…

The price for that 160k is horrifying though, esp. if the requirement is bursty rather than continuous.

Which is why you turn the knob back down when you stop being bursty.

But yes, it's pricy. It may not be the best fit for some. Hopefully by the time you're taking 160k writes per second you have a solid business model. I mean, Twitter peaked at around 8000 tweets per second. What are you doing that requires 160k, and do you really need to be storing it?

Re: Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

#85
All of the following three share something in common: 1) Microsoft Azure DocumentDB 2) Google Cloud Spanner 3) Amazon Web Services DynamoDB

Total cloud-vendor lock-in. It's clear why the clouds want users investing in these difficult-to-migrate-from solutions...

Re: Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

#86

One of the best things about AWS is the "Jeff Barr style" posts describing every service they release. I find them much easier to consume than a blog post like this.

Well, this post was a marketing post, not a product release. Product release posts in Azure are much more informative for a dev that this post.

Re: Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

#87
post #79
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might be right but Mongo supports them and Microsoft says that we can start using DocumentDb without changing any line of code which is not true.

Yeah I don't get why they're marketing to Mongo users, weird choice. This is a DB for companies trying to moved to a query-less architecture - something no one should be doing with mongo

I never thought about it that way but makes total sense. Clearly you 'get' it!

Re: Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

#88
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AWS has RDS - That's most certainly a database suitable for writing real world applications as its MySQL. Does serverless somehow mandate a non SQL solution?

RDS is server based - you need to pay to have an instance running per hour. That's not serverless. That's "serverful".

It's a cloud service just like Dynamo, the implementation specifics seem irrelevant here.

Touting "serverless" as some sort of mysticism that doesn't really mean anything useful doesn't really get anybody anywhere.

Re: Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

#89

I've been out of touch with Mongo for a while, but when did it stop being common practice to just hide :27017 behind a firewall with only your app's DB access layer (or, at most, a few nodes in the local subnet) talking to it?

> hide :27017 behind a firewall with only your app's DB access layer talking to it? Because if you can do without it, why bother? Developing an access layer costs time and money. If you can leverage the DB features to do what you need, you can make you stack simpler and more maintainable.

It does not take that much time or effort to set up useful subnet/vpc security in AWS. Put the database in your VPC, say only your application vpc can talk to it. Done.

Reasonably good security practices are not that much effort, and really it's a case for respecting your users for the most part.

The security trust game is starting to blow up. Yahoo just lost $250million dollars to it.

Re: Dear MongoDB users, we welcome you in Azure DocumentDB

#90

Microsoft trying hard to get developers to work on their platform and fail has really become very much fun. Microsoft deserves for being evil. Example: Microsoft does not save history in cmd shell(its so irritating for devs). The height of the cruelty is they aliased the curl and wget by default to its own program(do not remember).

Having a subpar shell application is evil?
Post reply on HN